My sexual orientation and my positions on gay rights

[Kelda]

And this is the last comment I will make on the topic.

Please continue - I think its an interesting debate... and it seems you have someone else here to fight your corner in Herr. I still fail to understand, so would be interested in you providing more conclusive reasons for your POV.

[HerrKaiser]

Okay Herr, I concur.. ONE other person has lexta's viewpoint.. anyone else?!

Nobody has the same viewpoint here completely but I'd bet my house that most people here support gay rights here.

(And I like my house. And I rarely bet. )

Perhaps others who would tend to agree with lextra may not find such a one-sided environment to be a place of interest.  

Nonetheless, your suggestions that someone who agrees with lextra does not support gay rights is flawed logic since it is abundantly true that full support of gay rights and support of civil unions (as opposed to the legal term of marriage) can live in the same realm, lest you agree that Bill Clinton, Barack obama, Hillary Clinton, for examples, do not support gay rights.

[HerrKaiser]

states are required to give full faith and credit to legal contracts executed in other states.

That is absolutely not the case. Take insurance policies, for example. They vary from state to state and are not transferable across state borders; a totally new and different contract would be required.

[HerrKaiser]

I simply cannot understand why people have such a problem with gay marriage.If we talk globally for a minute, there are plenty of faiths which allow the man to have more than one wife.In fact in early Christianity there are plenty of examples of polygamy, to allow for the birth of more children.I believe, even here in the USA that holds true,illegally, for certain splinter groups of one faith. So what therefore defines a "typical marriage"The answer is there is no such thing. A male member of the Islamic faith could quite legitimately argue his right to take up to 4 wives.We may not all agree with it.However it is permitted within the tenets of his faith.

Not sure how this comment lends itself to the gay marriage debate.

No one suggests that the variety of cultures and religions across the earth have a large spectrum of mating and family structures. So what? That does not mean citizens of the U.S. or any other country should, therefore, adopt any or all of those varieties as part of their own social structure, any more than we would find slavery, child abuse, and other 'globally' accepted practices as worthy of inclusion to our set of values.

[Kelda]

So Herr, Yu're gay aren't you? Why are you oppossed to gay marriage? I'm guessing its not becasue you like to be down on yourself... so .... why?

*bewildered look*

[Wayne]

garbage

Very nice.   

Letxa you still haven't addressed the first issue in the title of this thread: What is your sexual orientation?

[Wayne]

Apparently because we disagree on gay marriage that automatically means I'm wrong about everything.

[optom3]

Not sure how this comment lends itself to the gay marriage debate.

No one suggests that the variety of cultures and religions across the earth have a large spectrum of mating and family structures. So what? That does not mean citizens of the U.S. or any other country should, therefore, adopt any or all of those varieties as part of their own social structure, any more than we would find slavery, child abuse, and other 'globally' accepted practices as worthy of inclusion to our set of values.



There are already citizens of those cultures living in the USA and across most of Europe. So it does matter.Those citizens have not been told,your marriage does not fit with our model so sorry we will not recognise it.Like it or not, the institution of marriage in many different forms already exists here in the USA.
All I was trying to say and maybe I did not articulate my thoughts very well, was why treat a gay marriage any differently.
It is hypocritical, IMO  to recognise the polygamous marriages of some faiths, and have them entitled to the same rights as any other US citizen, yet deny gays those same rights.

How can you argue that marriage is one man one woman, period, when there are so many faiths living here, where one man, 4 women is tolerated. Or is there some dual standard  here that I am unaware of.

If you are going to state that the only permissable marriage is, the one man,one woman, situation.Then you have to deny the rights of all  who do not fit that model.Many of whom are already living here as U.S citizens.

It strikes me that a lot of the arguments here, are not about the only marriage that can be recognised is the man/woman one.Other types of marriage already exist,in the U.S. So it seems to be specifically an anti gay thing.

I am sure you will correct me if I am wrong and have misconstrued the situation.

[optom3]

 I give in.

For the 1st time ever on a thread here.Those who are against gay marriage, can stay with their opinion.They have not done anything to change mine.I never for a minute suggested that anyone who was anti gay marriage was anti every faith marriage.

I merely tried to point out that if your argument against gay marriage is because it does not fit with the one man/one woman model.Then you must by defintion be against all the other types of marriage that exist within different faith groups. Many of whom live here quite happily as US citizens, as they do not fit the model either.

Me personally, I still think as I did at the start of the thread, that all couples should be granted the same rights.

One thing I have learned is, I am truly shocked by how much anger and seeming prejudice has been expressed here. I also wish I was so perfect that I could set myself up as the moral arbiter of all such things.

I am a mere human though, so by definition flawed,maybe that's why I think gay marriage is fine. I am obviously not meant to be here amongst such super humans.

I am off to beat a hasty retreat to mere mortal land.

[Wayne]

optom, don't feel bad - we're definitely in the majority here!      (if not out there    )

It's interesting to hear opposing views though. Well, at least somewhat interesting.   

I think things are shifting in our direction, and I take some comfort in that. Even though people say all these words about why they oppose gay marriage (or any other equal rights for anybody) I still don't understand their point.

I suppose maybe they don't understand ours either ...       But, whatever!

Oh and CONGRATULATIONS on your 2,000th post!!!